2019 doe hydrogen & electrochemical compression annual ... · develop/demonstrate...
TRANSCRIPT
Electrochemical
Compression
2019 DOE
Hydrogen &
Fuel Cells
Program
Annual Merit
Review
Meeting
PI: Monjid Hamdan VP of Engineering
Giner ELX, Inc. April 30th, 2019 89 Rumford Ave.
Newton, Ma. 02466 Project ID: in0005
This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information
Overview
Timeline
◼ Project Start: Oct. 1, 2016
◼ Program Novation: Apr.-Dec., 2017
◼ Project End: June 30, 2020
◼ Percent Complete: 40%
Budget
◼ Total Project Budget: $3.52MM
Total Federal Share: $2.81MM
Total Recipient Share: $0.71MM
Total DOE Funds Spent*: $1.36 MM
* As of 12/31/2018
Technical Barriers (Advanced Compression) ◼ B. Reliability and Costs of Gaseous Hydrogen Compression
Technical Targets: Small Compressors: Fueling Sites (~100 kg H2/hr)1
1 FCTO Multi-Year Research, Development, and Demonstration Plan (2015). 2 100-bar
delivery/Commercial mechanical compressors are >6-8 kWh/kg (@7-bar delivery).
Characteristics Units 2015
Status
2020
Target
Availability % 70-90 85
Compressor Specific Energy kWh/kg 1.602 1.602
Uninstalled Cap. Cost2 $ 275k 170k
Annual Maintenance % of Capital
Cost 8 4
Lifetime Years -- 10
Outlet Pressure Capability bar 950 950
Partners ◼ National Renewable Energy Laboratory (National Lab) – Membrane/System Validation
◼ Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (Academic) – Membrane Development
◼ Gaia Energy Research Institute (Private) – Techno-Economic Analysis
◼ Giner, Inc. (R&D/Private) – System Development & Assy
Collaborations ◼ TÜV SÜD America – Codes/Stack Certification
◼ Intertek – Codes/System Certification
2
Relevance
Overall Project Objectives
◼ Develop/demonstrate electrochemical hydrogen compressor
(EHC) to address critical needs of lower-cost, higher efficiency,
and improved durability
FY 19 Objectives
◼ Engineer stack & cell components for 12,688 psi (875 bar) operation
◼ Scale-up membranes, MEA, Stack hardware
Assemble EHC Stack and verify EHC stack operation at a pressure of 875 bar.
◼ Initiate design of EHC prototype unit
◼ Optimize stack hardware and demonstrate cell performance ≤ 0.250 V/cell at current densities ≥1,000 mA/cm²
Impact
◼ Low cost, reliable, high pressure hydrogen to support FCEV penetration
Compressor reliability is a major concern for enhanced use of high pressure hydrogen systems and threatens the deployment of a hydrogen infrastructure
High Pressure
Stack
3
EHC Background
EHC: Benefits & Uses ◼ Solid State, No moving parts
Improves downtime
◼ No membrane degradation (no O2)
Enables use of low-cost Aromatic membranes
◼ Cross-cutting technology
Fuel Cells, Electrolyzers
◼ Alternative applications:
Home/Roadside-Refuelers
Hydrogen Purification/Separation
(eg. Storage/Natural Gas appl.)
Hydrogen Circulation (Refrigeration)
H2 Sensor Applications
Power Generation (Reversible)
Efficient, stable, high pressure, & high current EHC
operation requires:
◼ Water Management
Difficult under varying operating parameters
(Pi, P , Ti , Current, H2 ) o Od
◼ Leads to catalyst flooding or membrane
dehydration
High electro-osmotic drag (EOD) in conventional
membranes; 6X higher than can be supplied by
humidification
◼ Thermal Management
Limits to operating current density
Individual cell cooling required
◼ Mechanical Strength Stack hardware, membranes, sealing
Advanced EHC Cell Design
44
Approach: Program Overview S
afe
ty,
Cost, C
ert
ific
ation
Membrane
Stack
System
• Aromatic membranes: Synthesize membranes with:
• Low Electroosmotic Drag & gas permeation
• Compatible support structures
• Improve cell voltage performance
• Demonstrate 0.25V/cell @ 1A/cm², 5000+ psi
• Water management membrane (WaMM) :
• Provides passive water management
• Design high pressure stack & cell components
• Engineered flow distributor plates • Provides heat removal of each individual cell
• Enables variable H2 Feed (1-100 bar)
• Enables dead-ended feed
• Scale-up active area of stack (& membranes)
• Build/Demonstrate 875+ bar stack operation
• Build 0.5 kg-H2/hr prototype system
• Lab-scale demonstration of the technology
• Increase TRL level from 3 to 5
5
Approach: YR1 Tasks & Milestone Progress
Go/No-Go Decision Y1
Demonstrate EHC voltage performance of ≤ 250 mV/cell @ ≥ 1000 mA/cm2 in a 50 cm² stack platform utilizing advanced ‘Aromatic’ membranes
Successfully operated EHC at 350 Bar ≤ 0.250V @ ≥ 1,000 mA/cm²
Demonstrated Aromatic membrane operation at 0.217V @ 1000 mA/cm², 350 bar
✓
Task No.
Task Title Mile-stone
Milestone Description (Go/No-Go Decision Criteria)
Progress Notes
Percent Complete
1 Test Hardware Development
M1.1 Fabricate 50cm2 test hardware for evaluation of HC and WaMM membranes
▪ Designed & fabricated test hardware to accommodate distributor plate and WaMM
▪ 3 sets of hardware delivered to NREL for testing & validation of membrane samples
100%
2
Hydrocarbon Membrane Fabrication,
WaMM Fabrication
M1.2
Synthesis Aromatic membranes with IECs in the range of 1.8–2.6 mmol/g, protonic conductivity >0.1 S/cm, and electro-osmotic requirement <50-80% than conventional PFSA PEMs
Synthesize WaMM with water flux of ≥0.039 g/min-cm2 and conductivity ≥ 1.0 S/cm membrane
▪ Partially fluorinated Aromatic membranes synthesized (on-going):
▪ Conductivity: 0.106 S/cm✓▪ EOD: 50% of PFSA✓▪ IEC: 1.4 / 2.0 mmol/g demonstrated✓▪ Optimize/reduce back diffusion (on-going)
▪ WaMM synthesized: ▪ Water flux: ≥0.1 g/min-cm2
✓
▪ Through-plane conductivity: > 1.0 S/cm✓
100%
But continue
investigation
at 900 bar
Evaluate Cell Performance
M1.3 Voltage performance 250 mV @ ≥ 1,000 mA/cm2 (combined Task 1, 2, & 3)
EHC cell voltage performance @ 1,000 mA/cm² (300 psig): ▪ 170 mV/cell (PFSA) ▪ 105 mV/cell (Aromatic),
100%
3 Preliminary Stack Design
M1.4 Complete preliminary design of scaled-up stack (300 cm2) for 875 bar operation
Complete (May require fine tuning based on results from 50 cm² testing at 875 bar)
100%
4 Desktop Review of EHC System
M1.5 Complete Desktop Review of EHC system
Intertek 1st review round complete. Report submitted
100%
6
Approach: YR2 Tasks & Milestone Progress
Go/No-Go Decision Y1
Scale-up stack, membranes, and distributor plates to an active area of 300 cm. Demonstrate EHC operation at 875 bar and EHC cell voltage performance of ≤ 250 mV/cell @ ≥ 1000 mA/cm²
--- ---
Task No.
Task Title Mile-stone
Milestone Description (Go/No-Go Decision Criteria)
Progress Notes
Percent Complete
5
Cell Components Scale-up Stack / Cell Components
M2.1 Scale-up HC membrane in Task 1 to 300 cm2
Developed new membrane architecture and
sealing technique
• 20,000 psi (1,400 bar) seal demonstrated • Sealing under high clamping loads (not effected
by thermal or pressure cycling) • Demonstrated scale-up to 300 cm²
• Complete, but additional optimization on HC membranes required
• Bubble-tight seal for 875 bar stack developed & demonstrated
50%
M2.2
Fabricate scaled-up stack hardware including internal components (flow distributor plates). Stack will be designed to accommodate 300 cm2 hydrocarbon membranes and WaMM.
Demonstrated method to scale-up unitized cell architecture • Issues with stack component delivery times
10%
Preliminary Stack Design
M2.3 Assemble EHC Stack and verify EHC stack operation at a pressure of 875 bar
Fabricated components for a 50 cm² high pressure (875 bar) stack that will be used to fine tune the design of the 300 cm² • Modification in distributor plate required. New
parts received. On test. 1st run at 875 bar✓
20%
6 Prototype System Design
M2.4 Complete preliminary design of lab-scale prototype unit. This includes delivery of P&ID and PFD diagrams
Initiated. P&ID, PFD, Layout, Component Selection, and HazOp Study under review by Intertek
65%
7
Progress- Aromatic Membrane/MEA Development
◼ Hydrocarbon Membranes (BPSH)
Inexpensive starting materials
Reduces gas permeation by 1 order of
magnitude
Reduction in electro-osmotic drag
transport
vs.
Hopping Vehicular
◼ Biphenyl Series Membranes
(BP-ArF4, BP-ArSA, BP-SA)
Similar benefits as BPSH, but include:
◼ Higher protonic conductivity at
lower IEC with lower swelling in
water
◼ Improved mechanical stability
Membrane support structures
added for increased
mechanical stability
Po
lym
er
Syn
the
sis
Support
s
ME
A F
ab
rica
tion
BPSH-50 IEC = 2.0
Biphenyl-Based
Polymers
R =
R
BP-ArF4 BP-ArSA BP-SA IEC = 1.4 IEC = 2.0 IEC = 2.6
MEA Fabrication & Catalyst
Deposition at NREL
+
External
Support
Addition of Internal Membrane Supports 8
Progress-Latest MEA Developments
20,000 psi Development of High-
Demonstrated (1,400 bar) Pressure Seals Sealing
Pressures ◼ Membrane supports required for
superior creep resistance; when
operating pressure >2000 psi
◼ Difficult to maintain seal above 7000 7,000 psi psi with ‘Traditional’ membrane
(480 bar) supports
High operating pressures require
large clamping loads and a ‘Solid’ 2,000 psi membrane surface to seal
against (140 bar) ◼ Developed & demonstrated NEW
membrane sealing technology for 875-
bar EHC operation
Thermoplastic extension of
membrane
Demonstrated sealing to 20,000
psi (1,400 bar) Non-Supported
NREL support in characterization Membrane and optimization of new support
Traditional
Dimensionally
Supported
Membrane (DSM)
‘Solid’ Supported Membrane (SSM)
9
Progress-Latest MEA developments
Scale-up of EHC Membrane Unitized Cell Structures
50 cm² 300 cm²
Enables dry-build and
single-piece cell structures
Membrane extends
only ⅛” beyond
active area
◼ SSM bonds directly to polymer membranes (while in the acid form). Demonstrated:
Sealing under high clamping loads
Resistance to pressure and thermal cycling
Dry assemblies (with Dry membranes)
Unitized Cell structures (1 piece/cell). Ease of assembly/cost reduction
◼ Non-contaminating
◼ Process applicable to PFSA & Aromatic membranes
◼ Demonstrated scale-up of MEA and SSM to 300 cm² 10
Progress - EHC MEA Performance & Optimization
Catalyst Optimization Distributor Optimization WaMM Optimization
Be
st C
ata
lyst
Be
st D
istr
ibu
tor
PFSA PFSA PFSA
Membrane Optimization Back-Diffusion Optimization
Be
st W
aM
M
Be
st M
em
bra
ne
s
Operating Conditions:
Outlet H2 Pressure:
280 psi (~20 bar)
Inlet H2 Pressure:
30 psig (~2 bar),
dry/dead-ended flow
11
Be
st W
aM
M
Be
st M
em
bra
ne
s
Progress - EHC MEA Performance & Optimization
Be
st C
ata
lyst
Catalyst Optimization Distributor Optimization WaMM Optimization
Be
st D
istr
ibu
tor
PFSA PFSA PFSA
Membrane Optimization Back-Diffusion Optimization
3X Voltage
Improvement!
Catalyst optimization
provided highest
voltage
improvements
12
Progress - EHC MEA Performance & Optimization
Be
st C
ata
lyst
Catalyst Optimization Distributor Optimization WaMM Optimization
Be
st D
istr
ibu
tor
PFSA PFSA PFSA
Be
st W
aM
M
Membrane Optimization B
est M
em
bra
ne
s
Back-Diffusion Optimization
4.5X Voltage
Improvement!
Improved Gas
Distribution
13
Be
st W
aM
M
Be
st M
em
bra
ne
s
Progress - EHC MEA Performance & Optimization
Be
st C
ata
lyst
Catalyst Optimization Distributor Optimization WaMM Optimization
Be
st D
istr
ibu
tor
PFSA PFSA PFSA
Membrane Optimization Back-Diffusion Optimization
4.6X Voltage
Improvement!
Slight voltage
improvement,
Maintains membrane
hydration, stabilizes
cell voltage 14
Progress - EHC MEA Performance & Optimization
Be
st C
ata
lyst
Catalyst Optimization
Be
st W
aM
M
Membrane Optimization B
est M
em
bra
ne
s
PFSA
Be
st D
istr
ibu
tor
PFSA
Distributor Optimization WaMM Optimization
PFSA
Back-Diffusion Optimization
7.7X Voltage
Improvement!
Use of Aromatic
membranes with high
water content
Largest Improvements
related to Catalyst &
Membrane Optimization15
Progress - EHC MEA Performance & Optimization
Distributor Optimization WaMM Optimization
PFSA PFSA
Be
st C
ata
lyst
Catalyst Optimization
Be
st D
istr
ibu
tor
Be
st W
aM
M
Be
st M
em
bra
ne
s
PFSA
7.6X Membrane Optimization Back-Diffusion Optimization
Voltage
Improvement!
No further voltage
improvement, but
diffusion reduced.
PFSA (Mod): 50%
BP-ArF4 (Mod): 32%
16
MEA Performance (5,000 psig) as a function of Inlet pressure
Demonstrated Capabilities of EHC
◼ Dead-ended H2 Inlet feed
Simplifies system: no H2 flow thru, No external humidification, and No H2 recovery required
◼ Dry H2 Inlet feed (humidified H2 ok, will not improve performance)
◼ Variable inlet feed pressure up to 1,500 psi (100 bar), & Stable Cell Voltage at each inlet pressure
◼ High Voltage Efficiency to 2 kWh/kg-H2!
17
Voltage Efficiency:
4.2 kWhe/kg-H2 1 A/cm² (0.159V/cell)
2 .0 kWhe/kg-H2 0.5 A/cm² (0.078V/cell)
CD: 1A/cm²
PFSA/DSM Seal PFSA/SSM Seal,
membrane thickness variance of ± 0.0005”
MEA Performance (5,000 psig) as a function of Inlet pressure
CD: 1A/cm²
PFSA/DSM Seal PFSA/SSM Seal,
membrane thickness variance of ± 0.0006”
71 mV/Cell
6 mV/Cell
Voltage Efficiency:
4.2 kWhe/kg-H2 1 A/cm² (0.159V/cell)
2 .0 kWhe/kg-H2 0.5 A/cm² (0.078V/cell)
18
Progress – Modeling EHC Performance Where are we?
▪ Combined effect of iR-losses, Nernstian 5,000 psi (350 bar) Penalty, Catalytic Activity, Ionic conductivity, and Back diffusion
▪ Increased power consumption at high operating pressure (back diffusion)
▪ Max efficiency at ~500 mA/cm²
12,688 psi (875 bar)
H70 Refueling)
6,250 psi (430 bar)
H35 Refueling
Outlet Pressure:
1,450 psi (100 bar )
+1.0
kWh/kg
PFSA Membrane Thickness +1.0
(mils) kWh/kg
Efficiency (kWhe/kg-H2), 350 bar
0.5 A/cm² 1 A/cm2
PFSA 3.1 5.3
BP-ArF4 2.7 3.7 50°C. 100 bar Feed. Assumes
optimal water management
Outlet:5,000 psi (350 bar )
Inlet : 1,500 (100 bar Inlet)
19
Progress – Modeling EHC Performance Where are we?
▪ Combined effect of iR-losses, Nernstian 5,000 psi (350 bar) Penalty, Catalytic Activity, Ionic conductivity, and Back diffusion
▪ Increased power consumption at high operating pressure (back diffusion)
▪ Max efficiency at ~500 mA/cm²
12,688 psi (875 bar)
H70 Refueling)
6,250 psi (430 bar)
H35 Refueling
Outlet Pressure:
1,450 psi (100 bar )
+1.0
kWh/kg
PFSA Membrane Thickness +1.0
(mils) kWh/kg 0.5 A/cm² 1 A/cm2
PFSA 2.0 4.2
BP-ArF4 2.7→ 1.7est. 3.7 → 2.7est. 50°C. 100 bar Feed. Assumes
optimal water management
20
Outlet:5,000 psi (350 bar )
Inlet : 1,500 (100 bar Inlet)
Recent (2018/19)
improvements in
efficiency
Efficiency (kWhe/kg-H2), 350 bar
Progress - EHC Stack Design & Fabrication
5,0
00
psi
(35
0b
ar)
5,0
00 p
si
(35
0 b
ar)
1,0
00
-50
00 p
si
30
0 p
si
(20
ba
r)
12
,68
8 p
si
(87
5 b
ar)
12,688 psi (875 bar)
875 bar Stack Novel Design Features ◼ Proof pressure design: 20,000 psi (1,400 bar)
Scale-up active area to 300 cm²
Utilizing low cost materials: SS
Design incorporates use of integrated distributor
12,688 psi stack plate and WaMM, reduced part count
(SSM membranes Enhanced bipolar plate design for 20 ksi capability
required)
Evaluation of high
pressure components,
Flow distributors &
internal cell components,
membrane
strength/rupture testing
(70
-35
0 b
ar)
21
5,000 psi stack with
Distributor and WaMM.
(DSM membranes req’d)
Proof-Pressure Testing ◼ Hydraulic pressure assembly rated to 50,000 psi
◼ Test enclosure assembled - Measures deflection of endplate
◼ Stack successfully pressure tested to 20,000 psi (1,400 bar) with new ‘SSM’ MEA
Catalyst, Membrane &
Cell-Component,
Testing & Validation
Progress- 875 bar EHC Operation
875 bar Operation!
◼ Stack designed with SS internal components
◼ Operates at inlet pressures ranging from 1 to 100 bar
Single stage compression to 875 bar
Can be operated above 875 bar based on proof pressure ratings
◼ Optimization of 875 bar hardware followed by scale-up
22
Progress- System Design
Program objective:
Increase TRL from 3 to 5
Goal: Certification &
commercialization of the
technology
◼ Initiated procurement of system components/System assembly
◼ Design Specs: H2 Flux Rate: 0.5 kg/hr
H2 Inlet Pressure: 1-100 bar
H2 Outlet pressure: 875 bar
Dimensions: 4’x4’x1’
◼ System reviewed by Intertek. Over 20 standards* apply. Influences how system is designed
23
Projected Compression Cost
H2 Compression
Cost
Contribution
Current Status
($/kg)
Capital Costs1 0.175 4
Feedstock Costs2 0.239 (1000 mA/cm²) 4
0.114 (500 mA/cm²)
Fixed O&M 0.004
Variable Costs 0.001
Total Cost ($/kg)3 0.419 110 year lifetime, 2Based on electrical cost of $0.057/kWh kWhe/kg, 3Design
Capacity: 100 kg-H2/hr, 1,000mA/cm² EHC Operation. Assumes large scale
production. 4Compared to previous year: CapEX & OpEx previously 0.196 &
0.305 $/kg, respectively.
24
CapE
x
OpE
x
◼ Economics: determined using PEM-based system cost models
Feed Stock, based on Efficiency Range @ 350 bar:
◼ 2.0 to 4.2 kWhe/kg-H2
◼ Projected Operating Lifetime: designed to operate for a term of 10 years or more (> 20 years expected)
◼ Use of SS components vs. Ti
◼ 10 year lifetime: Membranes are not expected to degrade due to lack of O2 in system
Based on
1000 mA/cm²
Operation
Collaborations/Acknowledgements Stack and system engineering, development, and operation. Fabrication
and optimization of catalyst and membrane electrode assemblies.
WaMM development and optimization. Testing & validation
Membrane and cell component validation. Coordinate stack testing and
optimization studies of membranes, cell components & materials.
Testing of high-pressure EHC stack and system
EHC stack cost analysis and system-level analysis. Developing EHC
cost estimates, techno-economic analysis (TEA), and life cycle
assessment (LCA)
Department of Energy, DOE Fuel Cell Technologies Office (FCTO),
Ms. Neha Rustagi, Dr. Dave Peterson, Dr. Eric Miller
Dr. Sunita Satyapal
Giner ELX, Inc. -Monjid Hamdan
-Prime
Industry
National Renewable
Energy Laboratory
(NREL)
-Bryan Pivovar
-Subcontractor
National
Lab
Rensselaer
Polytechnic Institute
(RPI)
-Chulsung Bae
-Subcontractor
Academia Development of mechanically-stable Aromatic PEMs which serve as a
key material in this project.
Gaia Energy Research
Institute LLC (Gaia)
-Whitney Colella
-Subcontractor
Small
Business
Intertek/TUV
-Subcontractor
Nationally
Recognized
Testing
Laboratory
Certification for System & Stack
Giner, Inc.
-Subcontractor R&D
System assembly, sub-component fabrication, PLC controls. Includes
documentation for certification process
25
Summary
Demonstrated EHC operation to a pressure of 875 bar
◼ Demonstrated compression ratio of 875:1, single stage
◼ Membrane Development:
Designed MEA with new sealing properties;
◼ Enables bubble-tight seal to 20,000 psi (1,400 bar) & Stack operation to 12,688 psi (875 bar)
Resistant to thermal & pressure cycling
◼ Demonstrated scalability of MEA & seal to 300 cm², unitized cells, & dry build
Reduced membrane back diffusion by > 50% in PFSA, 32%; Aromatic membranes
Optimization: Demonstrated further improvements in cell voltage:
◼ 0.159V/cell (100 bar inlet); Stack efficiencies to 2.0 kWhe/kg-H2 at 5,000 psi (350 bar)
◼ Highest Efficiency for EHC operating at 5,000 psi (350 bar)
Further improvements expected in next round of aromatic membrane tests
◼ Stack Development:
Successfully designed, assembled, and operated a 875 bar EHC stack (50 cm² platform)
Demonstrate proof pressure of 20,000 psi (1,400 bar)
◼ Operates at an inlet pressure range of 1-100 bar, dead-ended feed, & dry H2
Reduced Stack Cost
◼ Unitization of cell components (reduced part count/cell)
Combined Flow-Distributor and WaMM compartment into single component
Use of SS cell components
◼ System Development:
◼ Initiated procurement and assembly of 875 EHC system
26
Future Plans & Challenges (FY2019-20)
Future Plans*
◼ Membrane: Fabricate aromatic membranes using SSM seal, integrate into 875 bar stack and evaluate
◼ Stack: Optimize internal cell components to replicate performance achieved in 350 bar stack, Scale up to 300 cm²
◼ System: Complete assembly of prototype system design
Initiate operation and system studies
Future Challenges ◼ Increase stack active-area to 300 cm2
Scale-up for aromatic membranes
◼ Further reduce stack costs
Endplate thickness & cost
◼ Investigate techniques to reduce cell component fabrication costs
Possibility of stamping components
◼ Investigate embrittlement of cell components
◼ Determine effect of H2 impurities
Giner ELX will conduct additional studies with impure H2 sources ◼ e.g. Removal, and compression, of hydrogen from NG source containing 5% H2
27 *Any proposed future work is subject to change based on funding levels
28
Technical Back-Up Slides
28
Progress – 875 bar Stack Design – Endplate Scale-up
29
50 cm² 300 cm² >1000 cm²
Minimize Endplate thickness with Bolt pattern
Stack Active
Area
Endplate
Thickness
(in.)
Dia.
(in.)
50 cm² 7 17
300 cm² Program Target 11 21
1,000 cm² 12 -
900 bar
stack
endplate
(50 cm²)
Large
End-Plate
due to
Nuts/Bolts
Dual-bolt circle
design